Recent Headlines in the IP World:
- Atty. Abigail Smith: FCA Upholds Reconsideration Decision Maintaining $100M+ Award Against Apotex for Cefaclor Patent Infringement (Source: JD Supra)
- Kara Eyer: Sheppard Mullin Adds Intellectual Property Team in Washington, D.C. (Source: Business Wire)
- Susan Decker and Matthew Bultman: Apple Sinks ‘Submarine Patent,’ Escapes $308.5 Million Verdict (Source: Bloomberg)
- Jonathan Stempel: Judge Tosses Patent Infringement $308M Jury Verdict Against Apple (Source: Insurance Journal)
Commentary and Journal Articles:
- Atty. Thomas A. Miller: How to Expedite Prosecution Before the Chinese Patent Office (Source: The National Law Review)
- Atty. William Smith: Intellectual Property 101: What is a Patent? (Source: JD Supra)
- Prof. Sudip Chaudhuri: Patent Protection and Access to COVID-19 Medical Products in Developing Countries (Source: SSRN)
New Job Postings on Patently-O:
Could you please get rid of all the political posts here? Thank you.
+1
Meh. Jus’ scroll-bar ’em Bob.
I do, however, enjoy those of 6, Night Writer, Anon, and a handful of other deep thinkers.
Why; some of them even contain . . . little nuggets . . . of . . . IP insight!
Huzzah!
Bro, that’s not just mere politics, that’s a major current event happening politically (fall of saigonish it’s being compared to already), could shake up the major political races and determine whether or not we will get True Equity(TM) implemented in patents or not.
“fall of saigonish”
Really?
FAR worse (any way you attempt to slice it).
I wasn’t around back then but I heard it was pretty bad when saigon fell to literal commies bro. Of course we ended up neutering them with capitalism anyway later on, but for awhile there things were touch n go. And they’re still nominally holding out for the ol’ stateless classless society to this very day in Vietnam (see Luna Oi’s vids on youtube for a real eye opener about the actual political situation there).
Corrected:
And they’re still nominally holding out for the ol’ stateless classless society to this very day in US
“And they’re still nominally holding out for the ol’ stateless classless society to this very day in US”
That’s like 2% of the pop in the US tho bro. Only 7% are leftists, and of that it’s only a minority that actually want TRUCOMMIEISM nowadays as even leftists can kind of begin to understand why serotonin etc. in humans and humans striving for status etc. largely prevents commieisms from ever being achieved (especially without a dictatorship declaring such would happen) without massive biological changes to humans.
Where are you getting your numbers?
Don’t you know that the “D” would label your reply here as disinformation?
“Where are you getting your numbers?”
Don’t recall, I’ve seen it several times in print for the 7% num, and it is now used as the more or less standard in online broadcast circles as the actual number of leftists (somewhat broadly defined) in the US. The number within the 7% which are trucommies is well accepted in political circles to be a small amount of the leftists overall, so I just was generous and said 2% (actual number probably well lower than 1%). That is so even for Vaush and other biggish names in the field who want that number to be higher. The problem of course is that these people are the motivated minority and splatter their sht all over twitter, gain positions of power to implement policy, go into “journalism” to try to control people’s minds through broadcast etc. etc. And they are quite successful, have been since the 60’s/70’s in fact.
I’m not even sure you’ve met an irl trucommie anon, you should go over on some of these leftistcasts and join the chat for some of these leftist streamers, they actually exist, as cringe as they are. But they are a small minority.
“Don’t you know that the “D” would label your reply here as disinformation?”
Not sure who would label it is disinfo regardless of them being dems or not. Thems the real nums according to many many sources and are well accepted in the mainstream debate right now. Though obviously right wing people like to smear a larger percent of the left as being commies, they generally just mean “commie-like”.
“now used as the more or less standard in online broadcast circles as the actual number of leftists (somewhat broadly defined) in the US”
That would be a straight up error, given that ‘broadly defined’ may well capture a MUCH larger number (like the “D” Biden voters – whether they realize it or not).
“commie-like” is NOT a smear.
You want the ‘old-fashioned’ type, but that is not what you are dealing with in the here and now, and that is NOT the number that you should be concerned with.
You would be better off counting buggy whips (and be as close to reality as you are now).
“That would be a straight up error, given that ‘broadly defined’ may well capture a MUCH larger number ”
Obviously if you want to broadly define it then fine, but we’re talking about dyed in the wool commies right now. Their aren’t that many of them, which is why you yourself just note that they aren’t who we are dealing with today. That’s correct, because there are so few of them. But there are a few around still.
“You want the ‘old-fashioned’ type, but that is not what you are dealing with in the here and now”
They still exist bro. No lie.
meh – Neo Liberalism has pretty much supplanted them as the ideological front runner.
If YOU want to use that label, then YOU are simply not being current.
It’s kind of like, you want to make a point of how few the old-school fellas are – sur ok, but your point misses the point in any meaningful discussion.
[T]hat’s a major current event happening politically (fall of saigonish it’s being compared to already), could shake up the major political races…
I guess anything is possible, but the next federal election does not roll around for 449 days still. The NYT headline 449 days ago was “Mnuchin and Powell Warn of Economic Scarring, and Offer Divergent Solutions.” Do you find that folks you know are still talking about the disagreement between Mnuchin and Powell today? Seems no more likely that folks will still be talking about the fall of Kabul in Nov 2022.
“Do you find that folks you know are still talking about the disagreement between Mnuchin and Powell today”
I do find that some folks do still talk about the fall of saigon (or at the least vietnam in general of which that was the bad aftertaste). But I take your point and I’m well aware of memory holing. Still, this may well stir up trump into running again.
“Seems no more likely that folks will still be talking about the fall of Kabul in Nov 2022.”
Idk bro, they’re already ahem on malala’s toes in the media. You know leftists in the media regard this as a major muh human rights catastrophe rather than a glorious expression of another culture (because of their xenophobia/islamophobia one presumes).
And, to make matters worse its just showing Joe doing practically nothing. A refugee crisis will occur shortly as it has already started, that will last at least a year or two, and will be on top of the ongoing migration catastrophe. The taliban will almost surely be ahem, “purging” people, starting with collaborators and no doubt working their way to malala et al. (initial reports state they’ve already started) as a result of the trump deal being gone back on. All because biden didn’t want to give trump the title of the person that ended america’s longest war in the history books allegedly.
Trump running again on this issue would be a disaster. He’s the one who got the current Taliban leader released from prison, and it was Trump who signed the peace deal with the Taliban that initiated the withdrawal of US troops. The pictures of Trump’s Sec of State with the Taliban leader were all over the news and are still readily available with a quick search. Biden finished the process that Trump had already started. Biden continuing a Trump policy was the mistake he made.
“He’s the one who got the current Taliban leader released from prison, and it was Trump who signed the peace deal with the Taliban that initiated the withdrawal of US troops.”
Yes we know padopoop for brains. He made a deal so we wouldn’t be having this. Biden reneged, made the gubmit of afghanistan look like it wasn’t even a gubmit (just a puppet) and then thus nobody wanted to fight the taliban and they got a sudden backing of support due to biden’s blundering.
” The pictures of Trump’s Sec of State with the Taliban leader were all over the news and are still readily available with a quick search. ”
Yeah, that’s how you make a deal derp derp.
“Biden finished the process that Trump had already started.”
Off schedule derp derp. Making them not honor the deal as biden did not honor the deal.
You literally don’t know the timeline.
It appears that Dvan is suffering the same type of cognitive dissonance that afflicts Greg DeLassus – both appear to be on the Liberal Left side of the political spectrum, and both appear to be on the Pro-Big Pharma that the current Liberal Left have in their gunsights (so to speak) in the US backing of the India/South Africa attempts for IP (including much more than mere patents) waiver.
Biden continuing a Trump policy was the mistake he made.
For whatever little this is worth, I disagree. I was not a fan of Pres. Trump, but one of the few good things he did was to create a situation in which we basically had to withdraw this year. That was not a mistake, nor was it a mistake for Pres. Biden to follow through and actually withdraw this year. Good on the both of them for realizing that—20 years in—it was well past time for us to withdraw.
“nor was it a mistake for Pres. Biden to follow through and actually withdraw this year.”
That’s true, but doing it in an incompetent way that got people killed and created a refugee crisis etc. etc. is on Biden.
It happened on his watch, so, yes, it is “on Biden.” I do not believe that it was actually possible to withdraw without the consequences that have since ensued. That is why both Pres. Bush & Pres. Obama preferred to kick the proverbial can, such that we stayed in Afghanistan long after it made any sense for us to be there.
Basically, there were two choices open to Pres. Biden: (1) pull out, with the attendant consequences of refugees, atrocities, etc.; or (2) kick the can some more, with the attendant consequences of escalating violence between U.S. and Taliban troops, financial costs, and U.S. & Afghan casualties. I am glad that Pres. Biden chose #1. I am also glad that Pres. Trump negotiated a deal with the Taliban that made #1 really the only realistic option, so that Pres. Biden could not be too tempted to follow Pres. Obama’s can-kicking lead.
The idea that there was an option #3 where we withdraw without adverse consequences is a fantastic illusion. If Pres. Trump had won and followed through with withdrawal on his schedule, we would have seen the same chaos and embarrassing photos. They would simply have appeared on a different daily edition of the NYT.
“I do not believe that it was actually possible to withdraw without the consequences that have since ensued.”
The trump deal would have avoided the worst. That was the whole point of him making the deal.
“Basically, there were two choices open to Pres. Biden: (1) pull out, with the attendant consequences of refugees, atrocities, etc.; or (2) kick the can some more, with the attendant consequences of escalating violence between U.S. and Taliban troops, financial costs, and U.S. & Afghan casualties. ”
Or 3) uphold the trump deal and pull out on schedule with reduced atrocities and fallout while upholding the legitimacy of the definitely-not-a-puppet regime thus giving the moderates a chance to hold their own and also go ahead and suffer the consequences politically earlier in your presidency (the non-dementia patient move).
” I am also glad that Pres. Trump negotiated a deal with the Taliban that made #1 really the only realistic option, so that Pres. Biden could not be too tempted to follow Pres. Obama’s can-kicking lead.”
I will agree there, at least trump did force his hand.
“The idea that there was an option #3 where we withdraw without adverse consequences is a fantastic illusion. ”
Of course there is adverse consequences that would have happened but it was going to be much less than what is happening here. Orderly withdrawal, no huge military supplies and equipment stocks left to the taliban, the puppet regime stays in power while we get out our people and any we’re going to take, the puppet regime stays in power while incorporating the taliban back into political life slowly over years. No military occupation of the capital blocking withdrawal, no unilaterally implementing policy after puppet collapses, no wanton killings, etc etc. The taliban had agreed to just not even move on the capital and many other areas if we pulled out on schedule, and we were allowed and obligated to enforce them not doing so at our discretion, you guys don’t seem to understand this. Now biden is in the ridiculous situation of having to try to enforce similar basically as an act of war rather than just enforcing a deal (really it was basically a mini-treaty). Fact is the taliban were not even super worried about taking power immediately (they knew they’d get a lot of influence eventually and were in no rush, after 20, call it 60, years of fighting), and would abide the deal.
Greg won’t listen to ANY of these points of yours, 6 – he has OMB-TDS.
Translation: “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.”
The republicans were favored—for a variety of factors—to retake the house before the fall of Kabul (URL below). They are still favored now. I am skeptical that Afghanistan makes a bit of difference to the dynamics that shape the 2022 election.
Imagine that it does make a difference, however. How would we ever know? How could we hope—with any amount of intellectual rigor or integrity—to trace a chain of causation between “Kabul falls” and “Republicans win” when “Republicans wins” was the expected outcome even before Kabul fell?
link to fivethirtyeight.com
“How would we ever know? How could we hope—with any amount of intellectual rigor or integrity”
You can pay attention to the frequency of the use of that having happened in political ads, and focus group reactions, and then see who all wins and by how much etc. etc. There are ways bro, poli sci people do this sort of thing all the time.
You can pay attention to the frequency… in political ads…
Fair enough. I guess we will see in 2022 how many GOP candidates successfully run on this issue.
[P]oli sci people do this sort of thing all the time.
Laughing out loud at the idea that political “science” findings might be taken seriously as an example of “intellectual rigor or integrity.” The “social sciences” are kind of like “the Holy Roman Empire.”
uhoh – this be like Greg firing on the flag of his own Liberal Left fellas……
“Fair enough. I guess we will see in 2022 how many GOP candidates successfully run on this issue.”
Yeah it’s not just ads, sometimes people outright will call out politicians in town halls etc. (see benghazi all the fin time), sometimes it’s what the politicians or their “camps” will put out as their official position or their debate etc. rhetoric as well. There are many vectors to watch for how it influences races.
“The “social sciences” are kind of like “the Holy Roman Empire.””
I mean I agree with you, but it’s the best we’ve got.
Although I should note that I am #teamHRE. If they’d have got their sht together better/faster we would never have had to deal with the 3rd reich as we’d still be on the 1st reich. And then we wouldn’t have the founding myth that modern society is founded on and all that which flows therefrom.
+1000
I’ve had on-topic patent posts ‘awaiting moderation’ (or whatever terminology is used for a post not being published) for weeks and this tripe is allowed to stand?
Actually your comments are some of the best too.
+1
+1
I am curious as which ‘filters’ you are running into.
There are several, including the ‘count’ filter as well as the George Carlin filter.
Sometimes, there are items that slip into moderation mode for NO apparent reasons.
The awaiting moderation kind of stuff is bs filters getting your posts bro, D and Jason aren’t actively holding your posts for review (tho they can go in the filter and get the posts sometimes it seems). Always copy your post to your “clipboard” before posting your comment, and if it gets filtered you gotta go back and make it so that it doesn’t get filtered with editing.
… unless it is a count filter situation.
Then you have to wait until the next day.
(and sometimes, it is a purely random thing)
Bros, did you guys hear that the taliban has returned and they have all new rules for women? Similar to the old ones, but all new!
“You will stay inside your homes at all times. It is not proper for women to wander aimlessly about the streets. If you go outside, you must be accompanied by a mahram, a male relative. If you are caught alone on the street, you will be beaten and sent home.
You will not, under any circumstance, show your face. You will cover with burqa when outside. If you do not, you will be severely beaten.
Cosmetics are forbideen.
Jewelry is forbidden.
You will not wear charming clothes.
You will not speak unless spoken to.
You will not make eye contact with men.
You will not laugh in public. If you do, you will be beaten.
You will not paint your nails. If you do, you will lose a finger.
Girls are forbidden from attending school. All schools for girls will be closed immediately.
Women are forbidden from working.
If you are fournd guilty of adultery, you will be stoned to death.
Listen. Listen well. Obey. Allah-u-akbar”
Have you bros ever seen such an ostentacious display of a a glorious other culture? I’m really glad that Joe Biden has helped them display their culture. Never let it be said that Joe isn’t pro-the glories of other cultures.
And this is the society we were going to turn into modern society with a modern publicly supported democratic government and modern army that could survive independently. After many years, lives, injuries and trillions of dollars? Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan.
P.S. The RNC post bragging about Trump’s successful peace treaty with the Taliban enabling U.S. troop withdrawal has just been removed but still available for reading elsewhere.
Are you really trying to throw dirt on “R” given the current “D” debacle?
Really?
It’s all “The Poopy Diaper’s” fault.
“P.S. The RNC post bragging about Trump’s successful peace treaty with the Taliban enabling U.S. troop withdrawal has just been removed but still available for reading elsewhere.”
Um the reason this is happening is because Biden went back on Trump’s deal derp derp. You didn’t hear the news I guess? Of course they removed it because Biden went back on the deal.
Also I’m getting initial reports that they will be appointing state-appointed brides of girls that are over 15 but are not yet engaged (or are under 40 and widowed). Up to 3 wives per fighter in some cases. Glorious different culture!
In other biden related news, I almost forgot about the latest. Did you bros see him nuzzling another 6 yr old during a recent bill signing vid? They say he just loves the youngens. Can’t get enough of em.
Safety first: link to babylonbee.com
The Taliban, always thinking about people’s safety inshallah.
Dennis, the first article uses “FCA” in both the title and the case citation instead of “Fed. Cir.” Is this just an individual attorney aberration or something new I missed? [FCA sounds like another government agency.]
Its a Canadian Court. Should have put that in the title.
The Chaudhuri article purposefully misses the far more interesting picture with its choice to focus on the patent side of the ongoing IP waiver story.
Anon
There are several “interesting” perspectives on this entire issues. It would take a treatise the size of Chisum to address them all. Having an article that focuses on one single issue, even if not what you consider the most interesting issue, is not a bad thing. It’s just important to realize that this one issue does not live in a vacuum but in the overall context of the many other issues involved.
Being distracted and NOT covering the underlying items that ARE the goals of India, South Africa, et al is NOT as you would want to paint the picture.
Nice strawman with the ‘in a vacuum’ line, but the focus ONLY on a patent issue as being the heart of the IP waiver is in fact trying to treat patents in a vacuum (you are guilty of what you are trying to imply for my position).
Comments are closed.